Top lawyers exit Paul, Weiss law firm after Trump deal
A leading Democratic attorney and three senior partners are departing from Paul, Weiss to establish their legal practice, according to the Politico.
These exits follow two months after Paul, Weiss arranged an agreement with the White House, pledging $40 million in pro-bono legal services for Trump-supported causes, in exchange for withdrawing an executive order that the firm's Chair Brad Karp indicated could have been devastating for their organisation.
The departing group includes Karen Dunn, former co-chair of the firm's litigation division, who has assisted Democratic presidential and vice presidential candidates with debate preparation since 2008.
Jeannie Rhee, who served in the Justice Department during Obama's administration and previously defended Hillary Clinton in her private email server case before joining Robert Mueller's investigation team, is also leaving.
The group also includes Jessica Phillips, known for representing major technology firms in court, and William Isaacson, a distinguished trial lawyer previously recognised as litigator of the year by The American Lawyer.
"We were disappointed not to be able to tell each of you personally and individually the news that we have decided to leave Paul, Weiss to start a new law firm," Dunn wrote in a goodbye email sent to the firm's partners.
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
One of the Most Successful Investors of All Time, Warren Buffett, Recommends: 5 Books for Turning...
Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List
Click Here
Undo
"It has been an honor to work alongside such talented lawyers and to call so many of you our friends. We hope to continue to collaborate with all of you in the years to come and are incredibly grateful for your warm and generous partnership.
"
The executive order, which referenced the firm's connection to a lawyer who had investigated Trump for the Manhattan District Attorney's Office, restricted the firm's access to government contracts, limited their lawyers' interactions with officials, and threatened to bar Paul Weiss attorneys from government buildings.
Federal judges have declared similar directives against Perkins Coie and Jenner & Block unconstitutional. WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey have filed lawsuits challenging comparable executive orders, with decisions still pending.
However, Paul Weiss and other prestigious law firms negotiated agreements to improve relations with Trump.
"Paul Weiss is grateful to Bill, Jeannie, Jessica and Karen for their many contributions. We wish them well in all their future endeavors," the firm said in a statement.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
2 minutes ago
- Time of India
US, China and Russia: Navigating the superpower trilemma
Today, Indian foreign policy discourse is mired in an important debate. Two key assumptions govern this debate: that New Delhi's ties with the US arguably constitute its most important relationship in the 21st century, and that any negotiations with Beijing are a signal of weakness. India-US relations are undergoing a tense phase. The tensions have primarily been instigated by US President Donald Trump's decision to impose a 25% tariff on India, and an additional, 'unspecified penalty' for continuing to buy energy resources from Russia. His social media comments have gone so far as to refer to both India and Russia as 'dead economies.' Naturally, this has called into question the time-tested nature of the partnership in the face of the 'China challenge'. With the US-China equation changing, India has to balance ties with both as well as work towards its own national interests Speaking of China, after a long period of severed dialogue, postures on both sides have slightly relaxed, though the road to stability vis-à-vis the border issue, or even China's backing of Pakistan, is long and winding. Nonetheless, communication and negotiation between the two neighbours is underway, and is perhaps a welcome break from the silent-but-violent treatment. Besides the volatility in New Delhi's ties with the two superpowers, there exists a bilateral dynamic between the US and China, which vitally impacts India. An intense back-and-forth of escalating tariffs ensued between the two economic giants earlier this year. Yet, Trump's recent statements seem to suggest that a trade deal with Beijing is in the works. So how does that affect India? So far, India has believed that Trump's continued dissatisfaction with Beijing will be a core aspect of mutual convergence between itself and the US. This definitely was the case under the Joe Biden administration. But if anything is certain about Trump, it is that nothing, indeed, is certain. So, the US and China may not be entering a friendly phase, but they sure are inching toward some semblance of stability. The dynamics of this fateful triangle require that India think in its national interests— sustained economic growth and security of its territory from both external and internal threats. And as PM Modi himself remarked in an interview in 2023, '[The] foremost guiding principle in foreign affairs is our country's national interest.' This begs the question: How should New Delhi balance the nuances of its ties with the US and China and the repercussions of their own thaw, while working to achieve its national interests? One way is not to believe that negotiations with China signal weakness. This anxiety is likely to play up as New Delhi and Beijing negotiate. Most recently, India has eased tourism rules, while China has opened up access for Indians to undertake the Kailash Mansarovar Yatra. To a great degree, India's geographical, economic and military constraints require that communication with Beijing continue for sustainable security to be achieved. This is not to say that India should give up its confident posture, or discontinue investments in de-risking or border security. It is also not a call for it to shed its affinity for the US. But the steps toward a thaw with Beijing — high-level political conversations, ministerial-level dialogues, and working mechanism consultations on the border — are necessary. And at a time when Trump seems to be prepared to meet the 'China challenge' alone, India must figure its own way out to do the same. Second, is to evaluate costs when it comes to fulfilling its energy requirements through purchases from Russia. The affordability of such purchases, and the historic nature of ties with Moscow (especially in defence), make it a vital partner to New Delhi. However, Trump is prioritising reciprocal access to the Indian market over having a vital partner in the Indo-Pacific. And in a world where the US is vastly more powerful than India — or in most aspects, even China — much of what Trump says, goes. So the question is, where is the common ground between India not shedding its friendship with Russia, not risking insurmountable tariffs from the US, and not enabling China's unchecked regional power? The intertwined interests of economic growth and stable security seem orthogonal in this situation. But it is important to face facts. If it wasn't buying oil from Russia, India would still get the tariff slap. If there was great openness in the Indian dairy and agricultural markets, which Trump consistently demands, there would still be an 'unspecified penalty' for trading with Russia. So, the acknowledgement that there is no absolute win-win, is essential. It boils down to assessing what is more harmful — not making any adjustments to the trade numbers with Russia, or the US. It is also important to acknowledge the trade-offs — if there is a significant reduction in the imports of oil and/or defence equipment from Russia, and the US becomes the preferred alternative source of imports, Moscow may become unabashed in its support for China in its disputes with India. If trade with Russia continues as is, India shall face agonistic tariffs under Donald Trump and an overall lack of support in regional geopolitics. It is indeed true that India's tariffs continue to remain high, market openness is low, and domestic innovation and production capability face challenges. Hence, is the first step to addressing the above mentioned dilemma to take difficult steps towards phased openness? Most likely. It may assuage Trump's concerns about the US's trade deficit, without creating many troubles in India-Russia relations. Finally, the worrisome trend of self-reliance across the globe is leaving fewer alternatives for India to replace its dependencies on the US, China, or Russia. Where it gets affordable imports, it faces controversial dilemmas. Where it sees a strong partner, it faces chiding and deriding. So, moving forward, even as the willingness to negotiate diplomatically must continue, India must invest in its own trajectory toward economic and military modernisation. Illustration credit: Illustration by Chad Crowe (USA) Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Trump push drives stablecoin urgency in Asian financial hubs
. . . 1 2 Asian markets are hurriedly updating their stablecoin rules as President Donald Trump's embrace of US dollar-pegged cryptocurrencies instils a fresh sense of urgency among the region's authorities. Recent developments in South Korea, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Thailand and the Philippines point to a proliferation of stablecoins pegged to Asian currencies - even as authorities raise concerns about capital outflows. Regional heavyweights like and Ant Group plan to capitalise by applying to become issuers. Shares in Kakaopay ballooned on expectations that it would do the same. Even China, which has for years imposed a sweeping crypto ban, appears to be warming to the notion of tokens that serve as yuan surrogates. It all stems from the US, where lawmakers recently passed legislation that will promote wider use of digital tokens that seek to maintain a 1:1 peg with the dollar. The White House earmarked dollar stablecoins as a priority in a Jan executive order, days after Trump's inauguration. "The Genius Act has opened the floodgates for stablecoin adoption," said Benjamin Grolimund, general manager for the UAE at crypto exchange Flipster. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 15+ Food That Clean Arteries (Most People Ignore) Undo "Whether you support it or not, stablecoins are now unavoidable." Overhanging Asia's flurry of activity is the fear of capital flight. The dollar reigns supreme in today's stablecoin market, with $256 billion in tokens pegged to the greenback. These maintain their price by managing reserves of cash-like assets, such as US Treasuries. By contrast, there's just $403 million of euro-backed stablecoins in circulation, despite a well established regulatory framework covering such products in the form of the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation regime. The crypto-curious nation of South Korea offers a case-in-point. Koreans are already piling into dollar-pegged stablecoins. Transactions involving USDT, USDC and USDS - three of the largest dollar proxies - on five domestic exchanges reached 57 trillion won ($41 billion) in the first quarter, Yonhap News reported, citing Bank of Korea. While China's next steps are far from certain, crypto firms including brokers are already preparing for the prospect of yuan-pegged stablecoins. Kennix Chan, VP at Victory Securities, said the firm is in active talks with a range of would-be issuers in Hong Kong. Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays . Discover stories of India's leading eco-innovators at Ecopreneur Honours 2025
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
To secure US trade deal, key ministries told to list what they can bring to talks table
FOLLOWING US President Donald Trump's tariff sledgehammer, the government has kicked off an exercise to thrash out concessions across sectors that can be offered in the tariff negotiations later this month. Key economic ministries have been asked to see what they can still afford to offer to sweeten New Delhi's deal when the US team is here on August 25. To reach an agreement, the Trump administration has been demanding much more than what the government has offered in its market access commitments, including lowering of tariffs across the board and removal of non-tariff trade barriers. As policymakers grapple with Trump's announcement of a 25 per cent tariff on goods from August 7, alongside an additional but unspecified 'penalty' for its defence and energy imports from Russia, economic ministries have started sending in sectoral tariff concessions in their jurisdictions. There are indications oil refiners have started reducing Russian oil purchases. Some of these concessions, if calibrated well, could ensure an opening up of the domestic economy, sources aware of discussions at the highest levels told The Indian Express. In fact, it was an external crisis that had forced the reforms of 1991. Most importantly, the sources said, an unnecessary show of bravado in countering some of Trump's assertions, however ridiculous they may be, should be avoided. India was one of the first countries the Trump administration had expected to sign a deal with, but slow progress has been a source of frustration for Washington DC. Like countries around the world scrambling to deal with Trump's tariff threats, India had largely adopted a principled, but non-confrontational, stance in an attempt to balance selective concessions with caution to safeguard its economic growth, and circumvent a backlash from domestic producers. Sources closely tracking the US talks with others said a majority of the countries that rushed to sign deals with the world's biggest economy ended up with lopsided agreements that effectively extracted more than what it gave. This includes the UK and Australia that have a trade deficit with the US. On talks with New Delhi, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC Thursday: 'Well, I don't know what's going to happen; it will be up to India. India came to the table early. They have been slow-rolling things, so I think that the President, the whole trade team is frustrated with them. And also, India has been a large buyer of sanctioned Russian oil, that they then resell as refined products. So, they have not been a great global actor'. The assumption in New Delhi has always been that Washington DC will maintain a differential of 10-20 per cent in tariffs between China and India; and that the Americans would be cognizant of India's traditional redlines that have endured for decades, including concerns over GM food crops and the need to safeguard the interest of the vast subsistence-level manufacturing base that has an oversized contribution to labour-intensive exports. The government is also keen to stay away from offering duty concessions on imports of agri items such as soybean, corn and dairy, in the interim deal. While the government has offered to cut tariffs on 55 per cent of US imports, this could be pushed up in the upcoming talks, given that in FTAs with Japan, Korea, and ASEAN, over 80 per cent of tariff lines were down to zero. Sources said the outer limit for a deal with the US, currently pegged at around October, could be brought forward, if fresh negotiations are positive. What complicates the equation for India is that the Chinese are at an advanced stage of negotiations towards a deal, which could have a favourable tariff rate and potential waivers on secondary tariffs, including possibly the tariff on account of Russian oil imports and the proposed 10 per cent BRICS tariff. China is currently faced with a 30 per cent tariff. From New Delhi's perspective, a deal needs to be clinched precisely for ensuring the gap in tariffs between India and China is maintained, even with a limited early-harvest type of deal. There is, however, greater receptiveness now within the policy circles to cut tariffs on some industrial goods, especially intermediate goods where there is the twin problem of high duties and an inverted duty structure (duty being higher on inputs than on final products). Alongside, there is a willingness to grant concessions in sectors such as public procurement and agri provided these are matched by the other side, like in the case of the UK deal. Also, India is willing to import more from the US, especially in three big-ticket sectors – defence equipment, fossil fuels and nuclear – to manage Trump's constant references to the trade gap, the sources said. Tariff rebalancing, if done right, could potentially offer an impetus to the economy, given that the biggest beneficiaries of tariff protection, especially the non-tariff barriers such as an increasing array of QCOs (quality control orders), are the big players. MSME units have been calling for these QCOs to be removed, especially in areas such as steel and textiles. Since 1991, New Delhi has gradually reduced its average tariff from nearly 79 per cent in 1990 to around 12 per cent in 2013, following which it has gone back up to 16-17 per cent by 2023. Sectors such as agriculture, dairy and automobiles, continue to be protected, even as the Ministry of Commerce and industry maintains that its trade measures are WTO compliant. Unlike its response during Trump's first term, where retaliatory tariffs were imposed, New Delhi has desisted from retaliating and is working on strategic concessions in sectors that the US is keen to target, while adhering to its own broad red lines. This involves areas symbolic of trade openness, including nuclear energy, fossil fuels and defence procurement. Think tanks such as Delhi-based Global Trade Research Initiative have said that by refusing to cross its red lines, particularly on agriculture, India has helped avoid 'the trap of a one-sided deal'. Once the official level discussions wrap up, there is a sense that a final call on the deal could come down to a conversation between the two leaders, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Trump. This is especially so since it is Trump who is the trade negotiator-in-chief. For India, the best-case scenario would be to get a deal of some sort now, and then build on that in the future negotiations that could run into 2026, experts said. With Trump announcing the tariffs and penalties on India, that phone call could come in sooner, they said. Anil Sasi is National Business Editor with the Indian Express and writes on business and finance issues. He has worked with The Hindu Business Line and Business Standard and is an alumnus of Delhi University. ... Read More
